Follow by Email

Monday, August 31, 2009

OK. We're back. Now we are talking about the bogus and illegal shakedown of Chevron in Ecuador. By its own admission, the Government of Ecuador for years neglected to perform its share of the environmental remediation. Indeed, in sharp contrast, it has systematically starved its wholly-owned oil operations of the funds necessary for reasonable maintenance and responsible oil field operations, preferring instead to divert its billions of dollars in oil proceeds to other purposes.

Since the government of Ecuador assumed full ownership of the operation nearly 20 years ago, Petroecuador has compiled a deplorable record of environmental irresponsibility, tallying more than 1,400 oil spills since 2000 alone. So it is NOT Texaco or Chevron that is responsible for this. They have not even been there since 1992, and they even got an all clear by the Government when they pulled out.

But Oil is not the only health problem in Ecuador. Cancer is VERY predominant. According to ASCO News and Forum - International Insight Cancer in Ecuador, a Website run by DOCTORS. Check out this list.

Olimpo Acosta, MDPresident, Ecuadorian Society of ColoproctologyGastòn Sierra, MDCourse Director, ASCO Multidisciplinary Cancer Management Courses (MCMC)Department Head of Coloproctology at the Social Security Hospital in GuayaquilNèstor A. Gòmez, MDASCO MCMC CoordinatorGovernor of the American College of Surgeons, Ecuador Chapter

Here is just part of what they are saying.

Contrary to world statistics, colorectal cancer in Ecuador is the seventh most common for women, and eleventh for men, so gender is a factor that is very important in our environment. In Latin America, we have the fourth highest rates of the disease, after Argentina, Uruguay, and Cuba. Taking into account age as a risk factor, this cancer typically presents after age 40 and is sporadic.

In Ecuador, prostate cancer is the leading cause of cancer incidence in males, followed by stomach cancer. In women, breast cancer is the leading cause, followed by cervical and uterine cancer. In these cancers, death can be prevented if people embrace healthy habits and have cancer detected in its earliest stages. One of the most important objectives of patient examination is to discover these cancers early.

Unfortunately, many people in our country are poor and uneducated. Many never receive health education and are unaware of the ways that diseases, including cancer, can be prevented. Even though there are public prevention campaigns, it is not enough to overcome the lack of education, literacy, and awareness. As a result, oncologists treat many patients who present in the terminal stages of disease, when the cancer is hardest to treat and the prognoses are not good.

Who runs the Healthcare in Ecuador? Who runs the Education system in Ecuador? Yup.

In addition, the people of Ecuador often work hard in conditions that constantly expose them to cancer-causing agents. Fishermen work eight to ten hours in the sun each day and have no protection for their skin. Some farmers work on the rice or corn harvest for seven to eight hours daily without sunscreen.

You want to talk about damaging the Environment and putting people's heath at risk?

Recently, there has been an increase in diseases that result from chemicals used during the banana harvest; fumigation planes drop chemicals that settle over neighboring towns and villages or rivers. Oncologists are now seeing a greater number of people, even newborns, with skin problems relating to these chemicals.

Where is the lawsuit against the Chemical Companies? Who runs those? Who is in charge of the spraying? Why is it being sprayed or allowed to settle on entire towns? In the water? Hmm?

You see folks, this lawsuit against Chevron is completely bogus. They, nor Texaco that they took over in the early 2000s, have NOTHING to do with the environmental damage nor the heath problems that Ecuador face today. What they are attempting to do is called Vicarious Liability. Hold Chevron responsible because of what they CLAIM Texaco did while they were there. Vicarious Lawsuits are also called "Deep Pockets" Lawsuits and usually end up settling out of court. Think of the lady that burned herself with hot coffee from McDonald's.

However, in this case, the evidence is CLEAR that:

1- Texaco got a full Clarence when they cleaned up and left Ecuador in 92.2- Chevron took over Texaco LONG after they left.3- Petroecuador, the Ecuadorian Owned Oil Company has violated Environmental laws for YEARS and THEY are the one's to blame for the Environmental Damage. Where is the Lawsuit against THEM?4- There are vast other contributing factors that negatively effect the health and well being of Ecuadorians all across the country.

Now I know, like I told you would happen, some of the Envionuts are jumping all over this. Search "Cancer in Ecuador" and you will find countless sights BLAMING Chevron. Blaming "Big Oil." Even some are saying EXACTLY what I told you they would. "We can not allow further drilling here. Look what happened in Ecuador." To bad for them, the FACTS just do not add up to what they claim.

Now with this VIDEO documenting $3 million dollar bribe, this should be thrown out of the courts, and the Ecuadorian Government should be held liable. After all, they ARE the ones to blame.Peter

Happy Monday to you. Yup. It's Monday, and I'm HERE! The Second one in a row. Last week I was talking about Back to School. This week, I'm only here for a specific reason. Our friend Irish Godfather sent this in to me at 10 pm last night. I'll be honest, I have been so focused on Obamacare and Cap and Tax, that this one ALMOST slipped right past me.

Now you all know that the Government is trying to do whatever they can to shut down Talk Radio. They are tired of YOU being educated on the realities of what they are doing. They do NOT want an educated Voting Citizenry. They miss those good old days of Back Room deals that are debated AFTER they accomplish what they want to do. Now, thanks to the New Media, you are learning about these things BEFORE they can get anything done, and YOU are stopping them.

Well, I and others, have also been warning you that it is not just Talk Radio that they have a problem with. It's also the Internet. Bloggers and others in the New Media, are working side by side with Talk Radio to do the same thing. So why would they NOT what to silence those opposing them Online as well. Well, they do want to. But how would they go about that? Here is one possibility. This is from Cnet News - Bill would give president emergency control of Internetby Declan McCullagh

Internet companies and civil liberties groups were alarmed this spring when a U.S. Senate bill proposed handing the White House the power to disconnect private-sector computers from the Internet.

They're not much happier about a revised version that aides to Sen. Jay Rockefeller, a West Virginia Democrat, have spent months drafting behind closed doors. CNET News has obtained a copy of the 55-page draft of S.773 (excerpt), which still appears to permit the president to seize temporary control of private-sector networks during a so-called cybersecurity emergency.

The new version would allow the president to "declare a cybersecurity emergency" relating to "non-governmental" computer networks and do what's necessary to respond to the threat. Other sections of the proposal include a federal certification program for "cybersecurity professionals," and a requirement that certain computer systems and networks in the private sector be managed by people who have been awarded that license.

"I think the redraft, while improved, remains troubling due to its vagueness," said Larry Clinton, president of the Internet Security Alliance, which counts representatives of Verizon, Verisign, Nortel, and Carnegie Mellon University on its board. "It is unclear what authority Sen. Rockefeller thinks is necessary over the private sector. Unless this is clarified, we cannot properly analyze, let alone support the bill."

Representatives of other large Internet and telecommunications companies expressed concerns about the bill in a teleconference with Rockefeller's aides this week, but were not immediately available for interviews on Thursday.

A spokesman for Rockefeller also declined to comment on the record Thursday, saying that many people were unavailable because of the summer recess. A Senate source familiar with the bill compared the president's power to take control of portions of the Internet to what President Bush did when grounding all aircraft on Sept. 11, 2001. The source said that one primary concern was the electrical grid, and what would happen if it were attacked from a broadband connection.

When Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate Commerce committee, and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) introduced the original bill in April, they claimed it was vital to protect national cybersecurity. "We must protect our critical infrastructure at all costs--from our water to our electricity, to banking, traffic lights and electronic health records," Rockefeller said.

The Rockefeller proposal plays out against a broader concern in Washington, D.C., about the government's role in cybersecurity. In May, President Obama acknowledged that the government is "not as prepared" as it should be to respond to disruptions and announced that a new cybersecurity coordinator position would be created inside the White House staff. Three months later, that post remains empty, one top cybersecurity aide has quit, and some wags have begun to wonder why a government that receives failing marks on cybersecurity should be trusted to instruct the private sector what to do.

Rockefeller's revised legislation seeks to reshuffle the way the federal government addresses the topic. It requires a "cybersecurity workforce plan" from every federal agency, a "dashboard" pilot project, measurements of hiring effectiveness, and the implementation of a "comprehensive national cybersecurity strategy" in six months--even though its mandatory legal review will take a year to complete.

The privacy implications of sweeping changes implemented before the legal review is finished worry Lee Tien, a senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco. "As soon as you're saying that the federal government is going to be exercising this kind of power over private networks, it's going to be a really big issue," he says.

Probably the most controversial language begins in Section 201, which permits the president to "direct the national response to the cyber threat" if necessary for "the national defense and security." The White House is supposed to engage in "periodic mapping" of private networks deemed to be critical, and those companies "shall share" requested information with the federal government. ("Cyber" is defined as anything having to do with the Internet, telecommunications, computers, or computer networks.)

"The language has changed but it doesn't contain any real additional limits," EFF's Tien says. "It simply switches the more direct and obvious language they had originally to the more ambiguous (version)...The designation of what is a critical infrastructure system or network as far as I can tell has no specific process. There's no provision for any administrative process or review. That's where the problems seem to start. And then you have the amorphous powers that go along with it."

Translation: If your company is deemed "critical," a new set of regulations kick in involving who you can hire, what information you must disclose, and when the government would exercise control over your computers or network.

The Internet Security Alliance's Clinton adds that his group is "supportive of increased federal involvement to enhance cyber security, but we believe that the wrong approach, as embodied in this bill as introduced, will be counterproductive both from an national economic and national secuity perspective."

Update at 3:14 p.m. PDT: I just talked to Jena Longo, deputy communications director for the Senate Commerce committee, on the phone. She sent me e-mail with this statement:

"The president of the United States has always had the constitutional authority, and duty, to protect the American people and direct the national response to any emergency that threatens the security and safety of the United States. The Rockefeller-Snowe Cybersecurity bill makes it clear that the president's authority includes securing our national cyber infrastructure from attack. The section of the bill that addresses this issue, applies specifically to the national response to a severe attack or natural disaster. This particular legislative language is based on longstanding statutory authorities for wartime use of communications networks. To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a "government shutdown or takeover of the Internet" and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false. The purpose of this language is to clarify how the president directs the public-private response to a crisis, secure our economy and safeguard our financial networks, protect the American people, their privacy and civil liberties, and coordinate the government's response."

Unfortunately, I'm still waiting for an on-the-record answer to these four questions that I asked her colleague on Wednesday. I'll let you know if and when I get a response.

Of course they are going to say "To be very clear, the Rockefeller-Snowe bill will not empower a "government shutdown or takeover of the Internet" and any suggestion otherwise is misleading and false." Just like they are telling you what is in Obamacare, in black and white, is not there. Told you Olympia Snowe has to go. She is nothing but a RINO. A tool that the Left use to claim bipartisanship.

This is another "Back Room" move that we need to keep a VERY close eye on. This is also a reminder to all those that have said in the past, "Well, the 'Fairness Doctrine' will not effect me." If you use the Internet, They want control of this as well, it WILL effect you. Just like so many other things, they will simply call it something else. Needless to say, I'll be following THIS closely as well.Peter

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Just got back from Miami and MAN am I glad this day was over. Joshua didn't want to participate, so we left WAY early. My Niece got her first speeding ticket going through Palm Beach. Josh is now officially sick with a cold. Everyone is tired.

But then again, I'm HERE! Welcome to the Big Sunday Edition of the OPNTalk Blog, I am SO happy you checked in today.

I want to start by clearing something up. In case you missed it, they buried Senator Ted Kennedy yesterday. Someone wanted to know why I did not say anything about his passing. I did. I checked and found I DID, but not here. I posted it on Facebook. So for all those true OPNers that sit on the Left, I'll say it again here. God Speed Ted Kennedy. May his family have the peace and comfort they need in this time.

I mean that folks. I sincerely hope that Ted made peace with God and his fate PRIOR to his passing. I sincerely hope that he is in a FAR better place than this of which he left. My personal feelings aside, he was a fellow Human being, and I wish his family well.

First, did you catch this? This is a message to all my unemployed friends out there. BE THANKFUL. Seriously, at least according to the Psychobabble community, you have it FAR better than those poor slobs like me, that have a job.

Simply worrying about losing your job can cost you your health, a new investigation of data from two long-term studies finds.

Surprisingly, the effect is worse than actually losing your job, the research suggests.

Yeah, forget all that stress and worry about how you are going to pay the Electric Bill, or Rent or Mortgage. Forget worrying about making that Car Payment, or where your next meal is going to come from. That's NOTHING compare to those that HAVE a job. They are more stressed than you.

"Based on how participants rated their own physical and mental health, we found that people who were persistently concerned about losing their jobs reported significantly worse overall health in both studies and were more depressed in one of the studies than those who had actually lost and regained their jobs recently," said Sarah Burgard, a sociologist at the University of Michigan.

"In fact, chronic job insecurity was a stronger predictor of poor health than either smoking or hypertension in one of the groups we studied," Burgard said.

{Laughing} So having a job, is MORE harmful to your health than SMOKING. Maybe we should look into BANNING Work. {Laughing} I'm all for it. What say you.

Anyway, going to fill my cup. I need it today. Many of them. Be right back.Peter

Can you smell the desperation? Seriously. It stinks. The New Libs. {The LWL} are desperate. They have tried nearly everything from denouncing you, attacking you, to attempting to dismiss you, but nothing they do can stop this Grass Roots Movement AGAINST Obamacare.

So what do they do? They drag out two has beens, with, let's face it, the ability to rally people toward their cause. Bill Clinton and Al Gore. The Dynamic Duo rides again. According to the Politico - Clinton and Gore reunite in Tennessee by Bill Nichols Bill Nichols – 1 hr 37 mins ago

NASHVILLE – Two old friends, fresh from a day of mourning in rainy Boston, came south Saturday night to pledge to a roomful of roaring Tennessee Democrats that Ted Kennedy’s dream indeed will never die.

Al Gore and Bill Clinton – ghosts of Democratic victories past who are increasingly showing up to buck up the faithful as President Obama goes through his first real trials in office – were the star guests at the Tennessee Democratic Party’s annual Jackson Day dinner.

As you would expect from two very skilled old pros, they were careful to not inject a note of abject partisanship into a day when much of the nation watched the services and burial for the legendary Massachusetts senator, a man Gore called “by far the most effective member of the United States Senate that I ever served with.”

And both men – as was Obama in his eulogy early in the day – seemed deliberately careful to underline the bi-partisan mourners who helped take Kennedy to his final rest Saturday. “There were as many Republicans as Democrats in that church today,” Gore said.

But Clinton and Gore also offered a skillfully threaded approach that might allow Team Obama to channel the emotion and determination many party activists feel at Kennedy’s loss without spilling over into the kind of raw partisan sentiment that Republicans have warned will trigger a major pushback as an inappropriate attempt to make political hay out of Kennedy’s death.

One problem with that. THEY ALL READY HAVE. They all ready have started to use Ted Kennedy's death to attempt to gain the sympathy vote. Just last night the AP posted a SHORT Article about what they say was a thousand supporters of Obamacare in NYC. Actually, here it is. AP - Up to 1,000 rally in NYC for health care bill

NEW YORK – About a thousand people rallied in Manhattan on Saturday in support of federal health care reform legislation.

The event near Times Square began shortly after the funeral for U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, and took-on the feel of a tribute to the liberal leader.

One person carried a sign that said, "TeddyCare for all."

U.S. Rep. Carolyn Maloney told the crowd the bill will lower health care costs for almost everyone. The New York Democrat also invoked Kennedy, saying the senator understood the need for change.

They are already attempting to use Ted Kennedy. The media started to do this before Kennedy's body was even cold. Back to the Politico

But the message, on a day when Kennedy was remembered as being devoted the least of American society, was that Democrats need to fight. On that, the now silver-haired man from Hope was resoundingly clear.

“You need to back these congressmen and let them know you’re not going to let them be steamrollered by a bunch of people who have been frightened,” Clinton said, in reference to the town hall tumult of the last few weeks. “Don’t let anybody tell you that President Obama wants to ration health care. We are rationing health care in America.”

“I’m not a very good politician any more; I just say what I think,” Clinton said. “But I have been waiting for this for 40 years . . . . to recreate the American dream.”

He is telling you the truth. He just said he wants to "recreate the American dream.” Obama said he wants to "Rebuild America." Others have come right out and say they want to CHANGE America. They are TELLING you their objectives. Sorry, I like it just the way it is.

Gore, in a much shorter set of remarks, was loose-limbed and noticeably thinner than in recent years – and he seemed to elicit the night’s most emotional moment.

Playing off the focus of the Kennedy funeral on the Gospel of Matthew’s parable of Jesus taking care of “the least of us,” Gore thundered that the country has “a moral duty to pass health care reform. This year.”

What a complete Moron. You know, actually, the more I think about it, the more I conclude that these Idiots CAN push all this for one reason. They have no God. I'm not joking. They USE God, the Bible, and attempt to ACT Faithful when it suites their need, but I really do not believe you can believe in God, and still push the things they are pushing.

Not to get to Biblical here, Jesus was talking about YOUR INDIVIDUAL responsibility to take care of those less fortunate. He was not, nor would he EVER, advocate Government take, forcible {Through creating Laws ETC} from those that have and giving it to those that don't. That is in NO WAY a Christian Principle. Jesus was ALWAYS talking about YOU. One on one. What YOU should do out of faith and loyalty to God.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say "Thy Government shat taketh from those that have, and giveth to those who lack." Like I said, they are DESPERATE. They are attempting to guilty people into accepting this garbage. That is the whole purpose of this bogus Religious group out there saying that people of faith should support Obamacare. They all work for or have worked for Soros. They are OWNED by George Soros. Sorry folks, got a little distracted there. Back to the Politico again. Actually, never mind. No need. You get the point.

They need all the help they can get. They KNOW that they are in trouble with Obamacare, so they are pulling out all the stops. But it is NOT going to work. YOU are to smart for that.Peter

"Yep. That's right. The Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei basically just told the Protesters: "Stop Or Die." Did you really expect anything else? I told you, Little Hitler is his guy. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was reelected before the elections even took place. They do not tolerate this type of thing in Iran. All these protests? We will most likely NOT see some of these people ever again. Soon, we may not even see Mir Hossein Mousavi again. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei gave a two hour Speech."

TEHRAN (AFP) – Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad called for the first time on Friday for the punishment of opposition leaders over the street unrest unleashed by his disputed re-election in June.

Ahmadinejad also renewed the Islamic republic's allegations that Britain sought to overthrow the regime, in a speech at weekly prayers.

"Serious confrontation should take place with the leaders and main instigators of the incidents. Those who provoked, organised and implemented the enemy's line should be confronted firmly," Ahmadinejad said.

It is the first time Ahmadinejad has made such a call against his political opponents, who have charged his June 12 re-election was fraudulent.

"Those from lower ranks and the ones who were deceived should be treated with Islamic compassion," he said.

Worshippers raised their fists in the air and responded by chanting "riot leaders should be executed" and "Death to America! Death to Israel!".

Doesn't that give you that warm and fuzzy feeling all over? Yes, now that Obama is President, Iran will love us. There will be peace in the Middle East, and the Sea Levels will lower.

Because of this, they may indeed be the next to go. Still there are people in this country that LOVE Iran and other Dictatorships, and would like to see America take lessons from them. Some in this country still see America as the main problem in the world and think that we have to change to make people like these love us? They will NEVER love us. They do not respect all of Obama's gestures toward Muslims and his promise to talk with those that hate us. Those that hate us, see Obama as weak and insignificant. They do not see him as wise and bold. But stupid and a coward. A child PLAYING President.

They only thing that keeps animals like these in check is fear. Fear of power. Fear of angering the most powerful country on the planet. They do not fear us any more. They are laughing at us. Time to wake up Obama. Time to stop the gestures, and start talking to them in the only language they understand.Peter

Forget all the things you are hearing in the Mainstream Media Drones reports that you are nothing but a bunch of Racist Radicals that hate Obama and are trying to kill Obamacare simply because you hate Obama. Forget all of what you hear from the MMD about the fact that this is doing nothing but HELPING Obamacare being passed. Forget the MMD mantra that "We have to do this for Ted."

IT'S WORKING! Even some in the Media are starting to have to admit it. One of the three Republicans that they were hoping to USE to say that this is Bipartisan is started to tell the truth. He seems to be backing away from this mess, and he even says that it's because of YOU.

WASHINGTON – Signaling a fading chance for compromise, a leading Republican negotiator on health care legislation on Saturday criticized Democratic legislative proposals as budget-busters that would reroute Medicare spending and restrict medical choices.

The criticism from Sen. Michael Enzi, R-Wyo., echoed that of many opponents of the Democratic plans under consideration in Congress. But Enzi's judgment was especially noteworthy because he is one of only three Republicans who have been willing to consider a bipartisan bill in the Senate.

Delivering the Republicans' weekly radio and Internet address, Enzi said any health care legislation must lower medical costs for Americans without increasing deficits and the national debt.

"The bills introduced by congressional Democrats fail to meet these standards," he said.

Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Olympia Snowe are nothing but RINOs and need to go. I'll throw McCain in there as well. They should just come right out and switch Parties, or they need to be thrown out of office all together.

But the chance of a bipartisan breakthrough has diminished this month in the face of an effective public mobilization by opponents of Democratic proposals.

NO! Not "public mobilization by opponents." It's because REAL AMERICANS and not just dumb Voters. It's because they took the time to Educate themselves on what is actually in this Bill and they DO NOT WANT IT! He even admits this here.

"I heard a lot of frustration and anger as I traveled across my home state this last few weeks," said Enzi, who has been targeted by critics for seeking to negotiate on legislation. "People in Wyoming and across the country are anxious about what Washington has in mind. This is big. This is personal. This is one of the most important debates of our lifetime."

AMEN!

He called for more competition among health insurers, for the ability of small businesses to band together across state lines to negotiate for lower-cost insurance plans, for tax breaks to help people buy insurance and for reducing malpractice lawsuits.

The debate over health care will resume in Washington after Labor Day, just two weeks after White House budget officials projected that deficits would total a staggering $9 trillion over the next 10 years. Though President Barack Obama has said he wants the total health care bill paid for without adding to the deficit, congressional budget officials have estimated that House health care proposals would cost the government more.

"The Democrats are trying to rush a bill through the process that will actually make our nation's finances sicker without saving you money," Enzi said.

FINALLY A Senator telling you the TRUTH about this. This is not just some Right Wingnut. This is a guy who was IN FAVOR of this until he started hearing from YOU.

Democrats also are calling for cuts in Medicare spending, using some of the savings to help uninsured workers. A House bill would result in a net reduction in Medicare of about $200 billion, though Obama has insisted the reductions would not cut benefits in the health program for the elderly.

But Enzi said: "This will result in cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from the elderly to create new government programs."

YUP! For Illegals and others. But as I keep pointing out to you, in their OWN WORDS, and even on Videos of them SAYING in their own words, THEY DO NOT CARE ABOUT OLD PEOPLE!

He repeated Republican accusations that the Democrats' plans would result in less access to certain medical treatments, citing a proposed government board that would research the most effective medical practices.

"We're a nation of people who want the ability to choose what will best fit our families' needs and it should be that way with health care, too," Enzi said.

It's working folks. This is a LONG and HARD battle. We must not waver nor get complacent. We must continue to fight this as if it were moments away from passing. We need to remind the Idiots in Washington that WE ARE THE PEOPLE. WE are their Boss. And like Senator Claire McCaskill found out in one of her Townhalls, we WILL fire them.

"Obviously you've got every right if I decide to run again to -- to do everything in your power to fire me if you don't like -- " cut off.

AUDIENCE: (wild cheers and applause)

Thank you Senator. We will take your advice to heart. ANYONE that Votes for this Bill, on EITHER side of the Isle, NEEDS to be fired.

As I pointed out to you in the past. Obamacare is not the only thing that the Vacationing Senators are taking heat for. Energy is another topic that REAL Americans are fired up about. Cap and Tax is just another blank in the Socialized and Fascist Quest that the New Liberal Movement is on.

Well the Energy Debate came to Tampa. Just a couple of hours drive away from right here, in Sunny South Florida. As our friend, Jane VanRyan reported, it was Democracy in Action

She posted the Following over at Energy Tomorrow.

If you ever want to see democracy in action, attend an Energy Citizens rally for jobs and affordable energy. Thursday, at the rally in Tampa, Florida, 175 people of all ages came together in hopes of sending a message to their elected officials in Tallahassee and Washington.

Just like Obamacare, the proponents of Cap and Tax, Carbon Credits, and restricted Drilling, seem bent of telling you lies. They seem bent of attempting to mislead you into thinking that these things are something that they are not. They want you to believe that it is all for the good of all Americans and the environment.

However, just like Obamacare, the more the Voters and average Americans get Educated on the FACTS and TRUTH of these matters, the more the proponents face opposition.

Gone are the days, well, OK, maybe not gone yet, but going away are the days of Politicians and the State Run MMD {Mainstream Media Drones} telling you what they WANT you to believe and you ACCEPTING whatever they say.

You know, all these people are out there telling us we have to behave, act civil, and have an open and honest debate on these issues. The problem is though, in order for us to have an open and honest debate, we have to get passed their open and honest LIES about their intentions and the outcomes of what the want to enact.

Truth is folks, most of these people do NOT want open and honest debate. They want you to "shut up and get out of the way." Obama himself said so. Sorry. I don't think so. I think I love my Country, my Freedom, and the American Dream just a little to much to sit back and watch ANYONE attempt to destroy them. No matter how "good" their intentions may be.Peter

This is a case that both turned out good, but horrible at the same time. This is a case were the IWA could go to a various number of people. From the Kidnapper himself, who is just flat out Evil. To the Neighbors. To the responding Deputy. However, I am going to award the Idiot of the Week to a man who says, I take full credit for it.

OK. So let me ask you a question folks. I tell you that there is something wrong. The person doing the "something wrong" has a history of doing such. Then I tell you that the person is doing the "something wrong" at so and so location. WHY would you NOT go to the location where I told you?

Well that's what happened here. Of course I'm talking about the Jaycee case. Back in 1991, the 11-year-old California girl was snatched from the street in front of her house waiting for the School Bus. The Father or Stepfather, said it was an older grey car and claims that he jumped on a bike and tried to catch up to the kidnappers. No one really believed him. No road blocks set up. Even Geraldo Rivera said "The Father is involved in this."

Jump ahead to today. 18 years later. 18 YEARS folks. THANKFULLY, Jaycee was found alive. She, and her two children, now 11 and 15, are FINALLY safe. They were found to have been kept in the backyard of Phillip Garrido's house in Antioch, California, living in tents and sheds. That grey car? Right there in the yard.

So for 18 years, a registered Sex offender, MURDER, and all out Scumbag, Raped and tortured this poor girl. He Fathered two children with her, of course one would have to ask if THEY were Raped as well, and lived out in the open basically without ANY interference. No one to stop him. Of course, one would also have to ask WHY he was even let out to begin with. But not even the Parole Officer seemed to be all that concerned with making the normal checks.

However, what I find TRULY amazing, is that this could have all ended in 2006. Police were called and TOLD that a Psychotic, Sex Offender, has children living in tents in his back yard. They showed up, and interview Garrido, yet, NEVER checked the backyard. The head Sheriff said this.

"This is not an acceptable outcome. Organizationally, we should have been more inquisitive, more curious, and turned over a rock or two."

You think? Here is his interview with the press.

Really? Well, OK Sheriff Rupf. YOU are the winner of the Idiot of the Week. You are also well on your way and in FULL running for Idiot of the Year. If I were you, I would seriously be thinking of FIRERING the responding Sheriff Deputy who did not even think about checking the Backyard.

Our thoughts and Prayers go out to Jaycee and her children. They go out to her Step-dad that so many BLAMED for being a part of this. I truly believe that Rivera also owes the Stepfather one hell of an apology as well.

We are told that Jaycee is "Physically OK." One can only imagine what her mental well being is like. I'm glad that all turned out, well, better than it could have been, but this cases has highlighted SERIOUS flaws in our Criminal System that needs to be SERIOUSLY fixed.

We hear all the time, studies have shown, and even most Sex Offenders will tell you themselves, there is NO CURE for this. One facing the Death Penalty said he "welcomes it." Because if he was let out, he would do it again. We HAVE to stop this. We have to do whatever it takes to ensure this sort of thing NEVER happens again.Peter

By law, Social Security benefits cannot go down. Nevertheless, monthly payments would drop for millions of people in the Medicare prescription drug program because the premiums, which often are deducted from Social Security payments, are scheduled to go up slightly.

“I will promise you, they count on that COLA,” said Barbara Kennelly, a former Democratic congresswoman from Connecticut who now heads the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare. “To some people, it might not be a big deal. But to seniors, especially with their health care costs, it is a big deal.”

The decision to freeze Social Security payments is being justified by the fact that yearly cost-of-living increases are pegged to inflation, and inflation this year is below zero — but that is largely due to lower energy prices, and that’s not where seniors spend most of their income:

Cost of living adjustments are pegged to inflation, which has been negative this year, largely because energy prices are below 2008 levels.

Advocates say older people still face higher prices because they spend a disproportionate amount of their income on health care, where costs rise faster than inflation. Many also have suffered from declining home values and shrinking stock portfolios just as they are relying on those assets for income.

The wise folks at conservative headquarters central (aka the American Enterprise Institute) say those silly old people are just getting themselves all in a tizzy over nothing:

But we already know that this Administration DOES NOT CARE ABOUT OLD PEOPLE! Unless they are on their side and in Congress. Cutting funding for those on Social Security is NOTHING. They want LESS people on SS.

I agree with you Godfather, and Kathy. It is messed up. But Obama came right out and said, maybe old people should just take a pill and go away. One of the founders of the Obamacare wrote that Old People should just DEAL WITH IT! Talking about sickness and the things we all face as we age. Now we learn, Thanks to Betsy McCaughey, that the number one guy, the Health Adviser for the President, and Brother to Rahm Emanuel, wants to change the very Hippocratic Oath that Doctors take to "Do no Harm."

I'm not kidding. He actually said this.

"However, other things are rarely equal—whether to save one 20-year-old, who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who could only live for another 10 years each—is unclear."

White House health-care adviser Ezekiel Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the 'overuse' of medical care.

Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, {Brother to Rahm Emanuel, yeah, NO conflict of interest there} health adviser to President Barack Obama, is under scrutiny. As a bioethicist, he has written extensively about who should get medical care, who should decide, and whose life is worth saving. Dr. Emanuel is part of a school of thought that redefines a physician’s duty, insisting that it includes working for the greater good of society instead of focusing only on a patient’s needs. Many physicians find that view dangerous, and most Americans are likely to agree.

The health bills being pushed through Congress put important decisions in the hands of presidential appointees like Dr. Emanuel. They will decide what insurance plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have, and what seniors get under Medicare. Dr. Emanuel, brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, has already been appointed to two key positions: health-policy adviser at the Office of Management and Budget and a member of the Federal Council on Comparative Effectiveness Research. He clearly will play a role guiding the White House's health initiative.

Dr. Emanuel says that health reform will not be pain free, and that the usual recommendations for cutting medical spending (often urged by the president) are mere window dressing. As he wrote in the Feb. 27, 2008, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA): "Vague promises of savings from cutting waste, enhancing prevention and wellness, installing electronic medical records and improving quality of care are merely 'lipstick' cost control, more for show and public relations than for true change."

True reform, he argues, must include redefining doctors' ethical obligations. In the June 18, 2008, issue of JAMA, Dr. Emanuel blames the Hippocratic Oath for the "overuse" of medical care: "Medical school education and post graduate education emphasize thoroughness," he writes. "This culture is further reinforced by a unique understanding of professional obligations, specifically the Hippocratic Oath's admonition to 'use my power to help the sick to the best of my ability and judgment' as an imperative to do everything for the patient regardless of cost or effect on others."

In numerous writings, Dr. Emanuel chastises physicians for thinking only about their own patient's needs. He describes it as an intractable problem: "Patients were to receive whatever services they needed, regardless of its cost. Reasoning based on cost has been strenuously resisted; it violated the Hippocratic Oath, was associated with rationing, and derided as putting a price on life. . . . Indeed, many physicians were willing to lie to get patients what they needed from insurance companies that were trying to hold down costs." (JAMA, May 16, 2007).

Of course, patients hope their doctors will have that single-minded devotion. But Dr. Emanuel believes doctors should serve two masters, the patient and society, and that medical students should be trained "to provide socially sustainable, cost-effective care." One sign of progress he sees: "the progression in end-of-life care mentality from 'do everything' to more palliative care shows that change in physician norms and practices is possible." (JAMA, June 18, 2008).

"In the next decade every country will face very hard choices about how to allocate scarce medical resources. There is no consensus about what substantive principles should be used to establish priorities for allocations," he wrote in the New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 19, 2002. Yet Dr. Emanuel writes at length about who should set the rules, who should get care, and who should be at the back of the line.

"You can't avoid these questions," Dr. Emanuel said in an Aug. 16 Washington Post interview. "We had a big controversy in the United States when there was a limited number of dialysis machines. In Seattle, they appointed what they called a 'God committee' to choose who should get it, and that committee was eventually abandoned. Society ended up paying the whole bill for dialysis instead of having people make those decisions."

Dr. Emanuel argues that to make such decisions, the focus cannot be only on the worth of the individual. He proposes adding the communitarian perspective to ensure that medical resources will be allocated in a way that keeps society going: "Substantively, it suggests services that promote the continuation of the polity—those that ensure healthy future generations, ensure development of practical reasoning skills, and ensure full and active participation by citizens in public deliberations—are to be socially guaranteed as basic. Covering services provided to individuals who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens are not basic, and should not be guaranteed. An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia." (Hastings Center Report, November-December, 1996)

In the Lancet, Jan. 31, 2009, Dr. Emanuel and co-authors presented a "complete lives system" for the allocation of very scarce resources, such as kidneys, vaccines, dialysis machines, intensive care beds, and others. "One maximizing strategy involves saving the most individual lives, and it has motivated policies on allocation of influenza vaccines and responses to bioterrorism. . . . Other things being equal, we should always save five lives rather than one.

"However, other things are rarely equal—whether to save one 20-year-old, who might live another 60 years, if saved, or three 70-year-olds, who could only live for another 10 years each—is unclear." In fact, Dr. Emanuel makes a clear choice: "When implemented, the complete lives system produces a priority curve on which individuals aged roughly 15 and 40 years get the most substantial chance, whereas the youngest and oldest people get changes that are attenuated (see Dr. Emanuel's chart nearby).

Dr. Emanuel concedes that his plan appears to discriminate against older people, but he explains: "Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination. . . . Treating 65 year olds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not."

The youngest are also put at the back of the line: "Adolescents have received substantial education and parental care, investments that will be wasted without a complete life. Infants, by contrast, have not yet received these investments. . . . As the legal philosopher Ronald Dworkin argues, 'It is terrible when an infant dies, but worse, most people think, when a three-year-old dies and worse still when an adolescent does,' this argument is supported by empirical surveys." (thelancet.com, Jan. 31, 2009).

To reduce health-insurance costs, Dr. Emanuel argues that insurance companies should pay for new treatments only when the evidence demonstrates that the drug will work for most patients. He says the "major contributor" to rapid increases in health spending is "the constant introduction of new medical technologies, including new drugs, devices, and procedures. . . . With very few exceptions, both public and private insurers in the United States cover and pay for any beneficial new technology without considering its cost. . . ." He writes that one drug "used to treat metastatic colon cancer, extends medial survival for an additional two to five months, at a cost of approximately $50,000 for an average course of therapy." (JAMA, June 13, 2007).

Medians, of course, obscure the individual cases where the drug significantly extended or saved a life. Dr. Emanuel says the United States should erect a decision-making body similar to the United Kingdom's rationing body—the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE)—to slow the adoption of new medications and set limits on how much will be paid to lengthen a life.

Dr. Emanuel's assessment of American medical care is summed up in a Nov. 23, 2008, Washington Post op-ed he co-authored: "The United States is No. 1 in only one sense: the amount we shell out for health care. We have the most expensive system in the world per capita, but we lag behind many developed nations on virtually every health statistic you can name."

This is untrue, though sadly it's parroted at town-hall meetings across the country. Moreover, it's an odd factual error coming from an oncologist. According to an August 2009 report from the National Bureau of Economic Research, patients diagnosed with cancer in the U.S. have a better chance of surviving the disease than anywhere else. The World Health Organization also rates the U.S. No. 1 out of 191 countries for responsiveness to the needs and choices of the individual patient. That attention to the individual is imperiled by Dr. Emanuel's views.

Dr. Emanuel has fought for a government takeover of health care for over a decade. In 1993, he urged that President Bill Clinton impose a wage and price freeze on health care to force parties to the table. "The desire to be rid of the freeze will do much to concentrate the mind," he wrote with another author in a Feb. 8, 1993, Washington Post op-ed. Now he recommends arm-twisting Chicago style. "Every favor to a constituency should be linked to support for the health-care reform agenda," he wrote last Nov. 16 in the Health Care Watch Blog. "If the automakers want a bailout, then they and their suppliers have to agree to support and lobby for the administration's health-reform effort."

Is this what Americans want?

So you see, cutting SS or Medicare and Medicaid is NOTHING compared to what they WANT to, and WILL do, if they are able to shove Obamacare down our throats.Peter

Note: From The Emails is a weekly Segment every Friday, or occasionally anytime, that appears here at the OPNTalk Blog. Please feel free to Email any Articles, Comments, Thoughts, Whatever, that you may like to share to opntalk@gmail.com As always, you never know what you may see here.

Thursday, August 27, 2009

Coming right up, I'll post the entire transcript of Rush Limbaugh on the Glen Beck Show. They are having a SCARY conversation. Especially here in America. Over and over again, I keep getting asked HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE? This is America. The greatest country in the world. How can people sit back and allow ANYONE to take over and destroy the country we know and love, the freedoms that have been bought with blood, and the future for our children. Where are all the Liberals out there? Those that used to fight this sort of thing. You know, TRUE Liberals. Those that stand for Limited Government. Those that stand for the ORIGINAL Liberal Ideology. Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, suitable for a free man) is the creed that holds that individuals should be free.

They USE to stand for Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. WHERE ARE THEY NOW? What happened since the Roman slave Spartacus and the famous words quoted by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. "Free at last, free at last. Thank God Almighty, we are free at last." What happened since Tie Dye and "Down with the Man." Where are all those spouting just over a year ago, Government has to much power and needs to be brought into check?

They all believe that they will receive, and they are all hoping for, a seat at the table. This is why they have shut up now. This is why they are PRAISING the take over of this country. Obama has reached FAR further past his Constitutional limitations than Bush would have EVER dreamed of. But you wouldn't know that listening to the Mainstream Media Drones. The MMD are bought and paid for. They ARE State Run. They do not think they will be touched when the crack down begins.

No, Liberalism, the original Liberalism is dead. The Liberals of today are NOTHING even close to what Liberalism actually stands for. They ARE Socialists, Fascists, and, well, Idiots, if they think that they will get ANYTHING from allowing this to happen. But that IS what they think. People like the Moron Bill Maher, who acts arrogant and condensation because he is PAID to, actually believe that he has a seat at the table waiting for him. So he goes on and on, spouting the New Liberal Talking points, PROVEN Wrong over and over again, and saying things that are so far outside the realm of reality, that a blind, deaf, and dumb person could see right though him.

People like Moveon.org, and the Daily Kooks, uh, Kos, and even people like Micheal Moron, uh, Moore, have all gone silent or attack people that have no power. Where is the movies about Obama Mikey? What about him spending us into TRILLIONS of dollars in debt Mikey? What about his take over of private industries Mikey? What about him attempting to silence his ONLY opposition, Talk Radio? What about the Freedom of Speech Mikey. That allowed you to make millions on those pathetic, and completely bogus movies of yours Mikey? Have another Donut Mikey.

Why would this EVER be said in America? The new Diversity Officer for the FCC, Mark Lloyd just praise Hugo Chavez saying this.

"In Venezuela, with Chavez, you really had an incredible revolution democratic revolution to begin to put in place things that were going to have impact on the people of Venezuela. The property owners and the folks who were then controlling the media in Venezuela rebelled worked, frankly, with folks here in the US government worked to oust him. He came back and had another revolution, and Chavez then started to take the media very seriously in his country"

He took OVER the Media you Moron. He shut down TV and Radio Stations. Now they are ALL, nearly like what we have here now, STATE RUN. They report whatever they are told to report. Just like most of the Mainstream Media that I pointed out to you were MOSTLY Privately financed. Not dependant on their readership, so they do not care if you drop them or not.

All these people, some of which I'm SURE have been promised a seat, actually believe that they have a bright future ahead of them in a Centralized Government controlled country. They THINK that they will not be touched. Just like those pushing the "Green Movement." They do not have to change, but they say YOU do.

Folks, all this is happening right in front of your eyes. Obamacare is a HUGH push in that direction. This is why it is SO very important to them. Now they will even use the death of Ted Kennedy to attempt to push it even harder. This is why they are putting into place all these Czars. All these people that are NOT accountable to anyone but the Obama Administration. And the Libs cheer. Is it true? "This is how Liberty Dies, with roaring applauds and great cheer?"

If these Morons were really about Freedom, really about Liberty, really about individualism, they would be dogging Obama FAR more than they ever did Bush. Mikey would have many more movies out there. The Headlines would still be reflecting the body counts in the War. But it's Obama. Shhhhh! Don't say anything.

No folks. Now is not the time to "work together" or to find common ground. Now is the time to keep it up. Keep the pressure on these Idiots to attempt to force them to do the RIGHT things. Now is the time to get ready. NOW is the time to get them out. They are destroying this very country and they are coming after YOUR Freedoms. It's not time to play Politics. Now is the time to STOP THEM! Now is the time to let them know, they WILL be out in 2010 if they continue down this path.

The sad thing is, all these Idiots that think they have a place at the table in the future, will find out when it's too late, just like Cindy Sheehan, that they are nothing more than pawns being used by those in power to get MORE. Then they will be in the same boat as the rest of us.Peter

BECK: Now joining me on the phone is radio talk show host Mr. Rush Limbaugh. Rush?

RUSH: Glenn Beck. How are you, sir?

BECK: Very good, sir. I want to play something for you. I don't know if you just saw it, but I want to play it again. This is the new diversity officer for the FCC, a newly created position. This is what he said at a speech or talk he was giving about Chavez's Venezuela and how the media work down there. Watch this.

MARK LLOYD: In Venezuela, with Chavez, you really had an incredible revolution -- democratic revolution -- to begin to put in place things that were going to have impact on the people of Venezuela. The property owners and the folks who were then controlling the media in Venezuela rebelled -- worked, frankly, with folks here in the US government -- worked to oust him. He came back and had another revolution, and Chavez then started to take the media very seriously in his country.

BECK: Rush, I find that breathtaking.

RUSH: I find the whole administration breathtaking, Glenn. You're doing great job this whole week. I mean I saw Sarah Palin even "tweeted" about what you're doing, urging people to watch. This whole administration is as radical and far left as any that the country has ever had, and what they're trying to do here to communications is simply stifle dissenting voices. They're trying to wipe out any opposition. If you look at Barack Obama and his track record as a politician, it is to clear the playing field. He doesn't even like debating his opponents. He just wants to get rid of them. And this "diversity czar" comes from a fringe, radical, Saul Alinsky-type of background; and the things that he's talking about doing -- and I watched your show for the first half hour today -- but the things he's talking about doing to shut down radio are simply un-American. It's not enough to say that it's not constitutional.

It's simply un-American, and make no bones about it, folks, Glenn is right -- and I think he's maybe underselling a little bit about as far as their intentions are concerned. The stimulus plan! Glenn, look at what they're doing to the US economy. Anybody with a sense of economic literacy would know this is not how you create jobs. You do not rebuild the private sector. This is being done on purpose. All of these disasters are exactly what Obama wants. The more crises, the better. The more opportunity for government to say, "Let us come in and fix the problem." His number one opposition is on radio and Fox News. His number one opposition is on radio. They can't go Fairness Doctrine because it's too obvious. So they're trying to do this backdoor route with "diversity" and ownership, a 100% tax on operating in order to pay public radio because they're supposedly fair. It's insidious. But I don't think it's gonna work in the end because the American people are too informed, Glenn. They're too aware of it. Their radio means too much to them. Their free speech -- freedom in general -- means way too much to them. And just as they're fighting back on health care and a number of other things, so will they fight back on this.

BECK: Rush, tomorrow on this program I'm going to lay out the case of the army that they are building right underneath our nose, an army that he spoke about on the campaign trail. If you watch what could only be called the organizations -- or the administration's organ -- anything involved with GE or NBC; you've got now Jeffrey Immelt on the board of the Federal Reserve, you have in the Oval Office consulting not only on health care but the financial situation, and they are an organ. If you watch MSNBC, I contend that you will see the future, because they are laying the ground for a horrible event that will be... What they're laying the ground for, anything from the right some awful event -- and I fear this government, this administration, has so much framework already prepared that they will seize power overnight before anybody even gives it a second thought.

RUSH: Well, I think because of what you're doing with your television show, your radio show -- what we're all doing here -- I don't think they're going to be able to seize it overnight without anybody knowing about it. You talk about the organized groups that they've got. Let's look at the health care situation, what's happening right now. The genuine passion, the real passion is in individual Americans' hearts and minds. Individuals are showing up. They may be going to the Web to find out where these town halls are, but they're showing up because individually they don't want any part of this. The Obama army has to be bought and paid for. The Obama army has to be given marching orders.

BECK: Right.

RUSH: The Obama army is not showing up with any passion for Obama's issue, which is health care. They're showing up because they've been instructed to by bosses. Now, this army that you're going to reveal tomorrow is probably going to be much the same way -- and I'm going to tell you something, Glenn. Passion, love of country --

BECK: I know.

RUSH: -- truth is going to outmaneuver and overpower fake passion, trumped-up people who are just given marching orders and sent out to act in a certain way. You know, we may be looking at Barack Obama destroying the Democrat Party. It's too soon to say that now, but we may be looking at that happen. There are reasons for optimism, but you are right: It is a dangerous time. It's the most dangerous time in my life for freedom and liberty in this country.

BECK: I will tell you, a lot of people would say, "Well, that's Rush Limbaugh. He's... You know, this is hyperbole," et cetera, et cetera. Would you agree with me, Rush, that this is not conservatives or Republicans or independents talking about this because they don't like Rush -- they don't like Barack Obama. These are Americans. I'm an American. I'm speaking to you as an American. This is bad for anyone unless you're in the power circle. You don't want to go down this road with what they're proposing with the FCC.

RUSH: No. Well, I don't want to go down the road with anything they're proposing on anything, Glenn. But you ask an interesting question. You know are people going to react to me simply because, "Well, it's hyperbole. It's what these guys do"? My first hour yesterday was chronicling how this man is systematically dismantling our ability to gather intelligence to protect ourselves against an attack. He is purposely using his attorney general to make the United States the villain of the world -- and I'm going to tell you, folks: from the bottom of my heart, I am uncomfortable thinking and saying these things about a man who's been elected president of the United States. It is terribly upsetting and disconcerting, and I wish I didn't think it and I wish I didn't have to say it. But there's no way to sugarcoat it. This is not politics as usual. This is not left versus right. This is not Republican versus Democrat. This is statism, totalitarianism versus freedom. And if these people are allowed to go where they want to go unchecked, then some people, a lot of people -- I don't think half the country, but close -- will wake up one day and find, "My God, what the hell happened?" Because this is not what they voted for. They had no intention of this. They thought they were getting something entirely different and it is a responsibility that we all have being honest and earnest to inform people of what these possibilities are because they are very real.

BECK: More with Rush Limbaugh next.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

LLOYD: In Venezuela, with Chavez, you really have an incredible revolution -- democratic revolution -- to begin to put in place things that were going to have impact on the people of Venezuela. The property owners and the folks who were then controlling the media in Venezuela rebelled -- worked, frankly, with folks here in the US government -- worked to oust him. He came back and had another revolution, and Chavez then started to take the media very seriously in his country.

BECK: America, I want to... First of all I want to thank the watchdog for bringing that video to my attention. You can be a watchdog. Just tweet me whenever you see things like this. But I have to ask you an honest effort here. I need you to scour the Internet and look for all the people involved with this government giving speeches and listen to them, and then pull them off and archive them yourself. Pull them off onto your own computer, because I think things could get scrubbed quickly. We're back with radio talk show host Mr. Rush Limbaugh. Rush, when I see this comment from him -- and yesterday, we were, you know, all on Van Jones -- an avowed communist, self-avowed communist, Marxist, revolutionary --

RUSH: Right.

BECK: -- advising the president of the United States. [John] Holdren, our science czar. He comes out and he says that you don't have a right to, you know, a number of children. If you want to have three children, there's no right in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence if the government says there's only two children. Where is the true outrage from anyone in the media? Why are these things not grabbing traction at this point?

RUSH: Well, that doesn't surprise me at all. I think the whole concept of reporting has gone out the window. I call them the State-Controlled Media because it's what they are. They're just repeaters. They take dictation from Rahm Emanuel for the most part, and they simply run with it. It's who they are, too. They think, Glenn, at the end of all this that they are going to be in the elite circle. They think they're going to be untouched by any of this. They think the Fairness Doctrine attack, or the attack on radio, is going to leave them alone. My father used to tell me when I was growing up and my brother when he was trying to warn me of the threat posed by Soviet communism and he told me about the media, he said, "These people are such fools. Don't they understand they're going to be the first ones shut up if this kind of thing ever happens in this country?" I think it's just hero worship. I think these people, a lot of people come out of the civil rights era. This presidency is symbolic to them; it's historical. They're not reporting -- in fact, Glenn, this is a great point. How is it that people know what's in the health care bill? The press isn't telling them. How is it that people know some of the plans the administration has? The Drive-By Media is not telling anybody anything -- and they are discombobulated. I saw Chuck Todd the other day go ballistic because too many people are doing news now that are not journalists, that are not qualified and they're reflecting people's opinions on the media and so forth. These people, it's embarrassing. I think they've met their Waterloo and their Waterloo is Obama.

BECK: When I warned on the Patriot Act -- which I was for as long as it had serious sunsets and as many booby traps in that thing as possible. I warned at the time I was really conflicted because you don't want to give a government this kind of power. The kind of power that this government has right now is staggering! Rush, they tried to go after you with Timothy McVeigh and tried to enact all of these things. Is it different now? Are you at all fearful or do you have any fear that these things will come to pass?

RUSH: Well, I do, and I take it seriously that they're going to try. But, you know, Glenn, they've tried a number of things with me over the years. You mentioned McVeigh. They tried to blame me, Clinton did, for the Oklahoma City bombing. They've routinely gone after me but they haven't been able to shake anything away and the reason is the bond of loyalty that I have with my audience.

BECK: Mmm-hmm.

RUSH: I have total credibility with the audience. It's an audience that continues to grow despite all of the new conservative shows on radio and television, and all of us in conservative media have that bond with our audience. The effort to discredit us is always going to fail. It will always fail as long as we remain true to who we are and don't disappoint our audiences in any way in terms of substance and being serious about what we really believe. So I'm confident that this can be beaten back. If I weren't, you know what, Glenn? I'd pack it all in and I'd spend my money before they take it and I'd go enjoy the rest of what my life is gonna be, but I --

BECK: That's quite a shopping spree. Can I come with you? (laughing)

RUSH: (laughing)

BECK: All right.

RUSH: There's plenty of room.

BECK: Mr. Limbaugh, thank you very much. I appreciate your time.

RUSH: It's always a pleasure, Glenn. Thanks for having me.

BECK: Thank you.

RUSH: And one of these days we gotta do this on camera. I lost all this weight. I gotta show the people.

BECK: I... I would... I think he's hitting on me!

RUSH: (laughing)

BECK: I think he's saying, "I'm a sexy, sexy man." Rush, thank you very much. We'll talk to you again.

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Remember Obama said, "I want to look forward, not backwards." He was talking about investigating Terrorist Interrogations by the CIA. He was talking about investigations into the Bush Administration. To his credit, Obama did not cave to the Kooks and those that, still to this day, suffer from BDS.{Bush Derangement Syndrome} That was until his poll numbers started to plummet, and he learned that the MAJORITY of the country was against Obamacare.

Now Eric Holder came out and said he is appointing a special Prosecutor to start an investigation into the CIA Interrogations. When asked about this, Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton Said this from Martha’s Vineyard.

“Ultimately, the decisions on who is investigated and who is prosecuted are up to the Attorney General. The President thinks that Eric Holder, who he appointed as a very independent Attorney General, should make those decisions.”

Holder works for Obama. Holder’s priorities are by definition Obama’s priorities. The facts make it clear that this Investigation is nothing more than an attempt to raise Obama's falling support amongst his Kook fringe base and a lame excuse to distract from the anger shown all across this country by REAL Americans that do not want Obamacare.

The Mainstream Media Drones are reporting that Holder’s decision is based on “new details” about the CIA Interrogation Program. Holder read the 2004 report with this "new information" nearly a year ago. There is no "new" information. Obama and Crew KNOW what the report said. It was just now released, and this "new" Investigation is just now starting, because they NEED a Wag the Dog scenario.

Of course the MMD will play along and hype it. Of course the Kooks will post this all over the Internet and chant "jail for Bush and death to Cheney." But all day yesterday, I heard quite a few people talking about this. DON'T BITE THE BONE!

I'm not even going to bother posting links here today. It's all over the place. Anywhere you look, you will find some in favor of it, and you will of course find many denouncing this. However, we must be diligent and NOT fall for this. We must stay focused on what really matters. Killing Obamacare.

Look folks, this is going to be just like most things from the Looney Left. It's going to be a show. It will be on the news every day. It will be in your local papers. People will talk about this at the water coolers. Even in these Townhalls that SHOULD be about Healthcare, or Energy, the script will tell them to talk about the CIA, Torture, and the War. They THOUGHT their Base would be all for them with Obamacare. They were wrong. With the exception of a VERY SMALL Minority of Kooks, most Americans understand that Obamacare IS Socialized Medicine and State Run Healthcare. Most KNOW what is TRULY in the Bill. SO they want to get back to what they KNOW their Base WANTS. Get Bush and Cheney.

But make no mistake about this folks. While this SHOW is going on on stage, in the back smoke filled rooms they are TRYING to find a way to pass Obamacare. They are hoping that people will forget about it and just accept it after it's done. We can not let this happen. Do NOT get distracted. Do not get complacent. Obamacare is all but dead, but it is NOT dead yet. Neither is Cap and Tax. Neither is Amnesty. 2010 is coming folks. 2010 is coming. They know it. You better realize it. You better get ready. Do not lose focus on what matters most at this time. STOPPING the Fascist take over of this country. Stop the LWL {Left Wing Loons} from destroying this country. 9 TRILLION in debt? Socialization of Healthcare. Take over of Private Industries. Blocking our Energy Independence. Czars galore, ETC. We can slow this train wreak down. But it's up to you.Peter

Tuesday, August 25, 2009

We need to watch this new movement by a couple of Greenie groups. Why? This is the way they ALL think. This is the Liberal mindset. This is the Socialist mindset. YOU will pay, they will do whatever they want.

Al Gore flies around all over the world, uses more energy in ONE of his homes in a month, than most do all year. But that's OK. He pays himself Carbon Credits. Hollywood Stars run all over, telling you that YOU better do YOUR part, while they live it up. Politicians talk about and do, create Laws that do not apply to them, that force YOU to change the way you live. Here is the latest.

The Energy Foundation, and the Turner Foundation, did a study, of which says what they were PAID to say, that we need to be more efficient. In turn, this will reduce out need to build more power plants, and of course, cut down our need for Oil.

I know, this is patiently absurd to anyone with the ability to actually THINK on their own. It sounds good. It SOUNDS Logical. But the truth is, WE HAVE THE ANSWER to Energy Independence. They just want YOU to change. They want you to be good little Citizens. How is this move toward efficiency going to get done? YOU will pay for it. What if you do not believe in this garbage or you can NOT afford it? To bad, they want LAWS Passed FORCING you to pay for it.

Advocates are taking the study, funded by the Energy Foundation and the Turner Foundation, to state legislators and regulatory agencies hoping it will bolster their calls for more incentives for energy efficient products as an alternative to new power plants.

Listen to this Idiot.

"We're not saying that new plants aren't needed, because new plants can replace old clunkers that need to be replaced," said Marilyn Brown, a Georgia Tech professor who co-authored the report.

"But we don't need to build for an expanded demand if the Southern states would begin to launch energy efficient programs."

Sounds an awful lot like "Hey, inflate your tires and get a tune up and you will save as much Oil as new Drilling will produce."

The study distilled 19 separate reports published across the region over the past 12 years. It found that better use of energy-efficient products could bring consumption 9 percent below the levels now projected for 2020.

It found that the South has been one of the last regions in the country to embrace energy efficiency programs and to foster a culture where consumers value energy efficiency.

You are the last to be BRAINWASHED into accepting the falsehood of the NEED to be energy efficient, in the name of saving the planet. It IS Brainwashing. Remember this? Brainwashing You To Think Green

There's little research on how to lower people's energy use, but early evidence suggests that many people will change if:

• They think others similar to themselves are jumping on the "green" bandwagon.

• They get frequent positive feedback for effort.

• They feel able to make a difference by taking concrete steps.

• They think their children will be harmed by global warming, or children encourage the family to lead a greener life.

This is to good folks. They are TELLING the rest in the movement. Here are the talking points. Read this again. "You have to convince people that they are not just sheeple. That everyone is doing it, so they should too. Make sure you give them a pat on the back when they do. Make them feel that they are now a good person. That they matter. That they are heroes for doing this. They also have to "believe" that THEY can solve it. Don't be going around telling them that there is no hope. Make sure they know 'we can do it.' If all else fails, tell them their kids are going to DIE. That they will blame them for not doing anything about it. Scare them into submission if need be."

And if THAT fails, pass Laws FORCING them to follow it. What do they want you to do?

The brunt of the energy efficiency upgrades would take place in the private sector. It advocates homeowners and contractors to install heat pumps along with efficient window treatments and insulation.

It urges the commercial sector to embrace new lighting standards and more efficient cooling systems. And the report calls for aging boilers and burners in industrial plans to be replaced with newer and more efficient versions.

The technology to make the changes already exists, the report said, but it will take a host of more aggressive incentives to prod residents and business owners into action.

Along with laws saying you HAVE to. BILLIONS of dollars will be needed to make these changes. YOU will pay for them. YOU will pay for the changes to your home You will pay for the changes to the Power Planets through Higher Energy Costs. NOTHING will be solved. There is truly NO incentives to do this. You spend the money to install heat pumps along with efficient window treatments, insulation, energy efficient appliances and whatever THEY deem necessary, and you will NOT save money. Your energy costs will go UP because the Energy Companies, the Power Planets will charge you higher prices to upgrade what THEY have to.

Their answer to this? Laws.

Environmental advocates are already using the report's findings to push for those changes. A group met with utility executives a few weeks ago to discuss the study, and they have since fanned out to meet with lawmakers and regulatory agencies.

They are even telling Utility Companies, "Hey, in the long run, you will make a lot more. You can CHARGE more because you are doing this for the environment." Do you doubt that?

Ben Taube, the executive director of the Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance, said he is planning to discuss the report with business leaders and legislators at a conference in Georgia on Wednesday.

The challenge, though, will be proving that policy encouraging more efficiency can pay economic dividends, he said.

"What we have to overcome is how does energy efficiency compete?" Taube said. "We need to focus on how to encourage a utility to invest into energy efficiency and also recoup the cost and even turn a profit."

Standard Progressive Lib, Socialist, bunk. YOU have to change to fit our agenda. Even though to this day, we have proven NOTHING. There is NO THREAT. There is no need for any of this. If you want to go out and spend the thousands of dollars to become more energy efficient, to save money in the long run, great. But the way that they set this up, you can do that, then you will STILL pay more. Unless you are someone like Al Gore, Rush Limbaugh, Bill Gates, the Politicians passing the Laws for you to follow, or whomever, that can AFFORD to pay Carbon Credits and continue to live how they want. For most, you WILL do what they say, or else.

I can not say it enough folks. 2010 is coming. Get ready. Get Educated. When the time comes, get out there and VOTE!Peter